Custom Search
Site Home Archive Home FAQ Home How to search the Archive How to Navigate the Archive
Compare FPGA features and resources
Threads starting:
Authors:A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
<krishnans@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1137031629.836968.325050@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com... > > Also you may need this patch forWInXP > "MFC applications leak GDI objects on computers that are running > Windows XP" > http://support.microsoft.com/?id=319740 > FWIW, I (probably!) downloaded this patch from http://www.cakewalk.com/Support/kb/kb2005243.asp Cheers, Syms.Article: 94476
Modelsim has to be downloaded and licensed seperately. LeonArticle: 94477
It was a long time ago, but I think Xilinx told me to download an earlier version of iMPACT. I only had a problem with CPLDs, IIRC. It found the cable OK, but they wouldn't program. LeonArticle: 94478
I have seen one or two, but it was a long time ago. People doing DSP on FPGAs prefer implementing the function directly in hardware as it's much faster and more cost-effective. LeonArticle: 94479
Sudhir.Singh@email.com wrote: > Hi folks, > are there any DSP soft processor cores for fpgas available. I have done > a search and only found 32 bit RISCs but no DSP processor cores. > Thanks in advance > Sudhir > Why? If you have DSP function to perform, do it in hardware, it is much faster and consumes less power. Otherwise, use a dedicated DSP microprocessor...again, far faster and consumes less power, and more supportable.Article: 94480
Hi, I'm completely new to FPGA:s. Assume the FPGA is up and running and all startup settings are initiated. How long does it take to load a new logic scheme into the FPGA? For instance if I want to change the scheme from some previously uploaded image algorithm to some encrypter algorithm, how long time would that take in average? Are we talking microseconds or even seconds? Thanks DanielArticle: 94481
Hello, I want to use a second Digilent VDEC videodevice at one time with another on the Vertex II Pro Developmentsystem board. Because this board has only one highspeed Digilent Connector (J37), I need to construct an adapter for the lowspeed Connector (J5 - J6). Does someone know, where I can get an Hirose FX2 connector (in germany/europe)? Can I use J5 - J6 with the signal-clock, which is necessary for a Digilent VDEC videodevice (54MHz)? Thanks, LudwigArticle: 94482
Hi Just use level shifters between the PCI and FPGA .... Have made that my slef and works fine ... Send me an email for schemtics Regards, p >Hello, > >I have to design a board with a PCI interface which shall be compliant with >a larg range of PCI versions ! >3.3V 32bits / 33Mhz >5V 32bits / 33Mhz >3.3V 64 bits / 66 Mhz > >The board should use V2P xilinx FPGA so what bothers me is the 3.3V and 5V >compliance. >Is there a simple solution to achieve this ? > >Thanks. > >Stéphane. > > > >Article: 94483
dannymarcus@gmail.com wrote: > Hi, > > I'm completely new to FPGA:s. > Assume the FPGA is up and running and all startup settings are > initiated. How long > does it take to load a new logic scheme into the FPGA? For instance if > I want to > change the scheme from some previously uploaded image algorithm to some > encrypter algorithm, how long time would that take in average? Are we > talking microseconds or > even seconds? > > Thanks > Daniel This depends on the part. If you use the largest FPGA's and a serial loader you could be in the seconds range. Many FPGA's have parallel configuration interfaces if you're willing to give up the I/O pins for it. This can reduce timing to low milliseconds for the whole part or even microseconds if the part can be partially reconfigured. Lattice has some new parts that are marketed as CPLD's, but are really FPGA's. The MACHXO series allows you to reconfigure the internal flash while the part is still running the previous version. Then you can switch to the new program quite quickly. The largest of these parts has only 2280 LUTs, though. Large FPGA's can have 150,000 LUTs. If you know how large a part you need to do your job, you can generally find the configuration time in the data sheet. You might find for example that a medium sized FPGA has 2 megabits of configuration data and can load serially at 20 MHz, so configuration would take about 100 milliseconds. There is usually some additional time for the part to initialize itself, but small compared to the serial bit loading. If you're serious about quickly changing configuration you need to look at parallel configuration methods and partial reconfiguration. Together these attributes can allow you to quickly and seamlessly switch functionality. However expect a lot of headaches in the design process. Google for partial reconfig in this group. Hope this helps, GaborArticle: 94484
Sean Durkin wrote: [snip] > There's a configuration switch you can set to "Allow unmatched > LOC"-attributes which would allow you to finish the flow despite of the > error, but that's not what you want since obviously there's something > wrong with your design which you otherwise wouldn't notice. > > cu, > Sean Actually this can be quite useful, since you'll have the reports that follow the "translate" process. This can show you whether your clock has actually been removed from the design or somehow got re-named so it didn't match the LOC constraint. A look at the pad report can show this problem. Godd luck, GaborArticle: 94485
wuyi316904@gmail.com schrieb: > Hi,in my project,i need some bufs to delay some signals,but after > synthesising,the code:#20 does't have any affects.Is there some way to > keep the delay?For example,some constraint for synthesis or other. > Hi, The verilog # operater and the vhdl after statement are not synthesizable and (as you already observed) therefore ignored during synthesis. As mentioned before by cationebox, Flipflops/registres are a proper way to delay signals by n clock periods (n = number of serialized ffs ). Have a nice synthesis EilertArticle: 94486
<dannymarcus@gmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:1137069666.760894.93190@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > Hi, > > I'm completely new to FPGA:s. > Assume the FPGA is up and running and all startup settings are > initiated. How long > does it take to load a new logic scheme into the FPGA? For instance if > I want to > change the scheme from some previously uploaded image algorithm to some > encrypter algorithm, how long time would that take in average? Are we > talking microseconds or > even seconds? > > Thanks > Daniel > milliseconds to seconds in worst case, dependig the configuration type and solution being used -- Antti Lukats http://www.xilant.comArticle: 94487
Thanks. I'll look around in some whitepapers I got hold of.Article: 94488
> I am with the jury on this one. Which is exactly my point: this contract was reviewed by lawyers for accuracy and they felt that "bodily injury" includes death. So much for legal "precision". TomArticle: 94489
After switching from ISE 6.i to 7.i (What is the i anyway? integer?) I find that I can simulate a dcm ok but can't simulate a BRAM. I get this error: # ** Error: (vcom-11) Could not find C:/Modeltech_xe_starter/win32xoem/../xilinx/vhdl/xilinxcorelib.blkmemdp_v6_1. I get this error on the ISE simulator which I'm finding seems to be a disguised version of the ModelSim simulator. Can anyone comment on the politics behind this move? Brad Smallridge aivision dot comArticle: 94490
Guys I'm going home with a problem unsolved. After an ALTERA EPM570F has been programmed can it still be boundary scanned using the original BSDL file or does the fact that IO pins are now hard wired as Input or Output mean that they can only be scanned as Inputs or Outputs. (nneding the BSDL to be changed). I have spent an hour on the ALTERA website and it is not at all clear. In some places it suggests that ISP is the last JTAG thing that would be done. Apologies for perhaps being very slightly off topic but a simple yes or know from someone who knows is all that I'm hoping for. Regards ColinArticle: 94491
Zara wrote: > On 11 Jan 2006 22:22:55 -0800, "Alan Nishioka" <alan@nishioka.com> > wrote: > > >Zara wrote: > >> BTW, someone from Xilinx told me some time ago that EDK 8.1 will, at > >> last!, support C++. I hope it will. > > > >C++ works for me in 6.3 and 7.1 What doesn't work? > >I had to add extern "C" to a few header files. I don't use many C++ > >features, however. > > > Whenever I use templates, chaos begins... I see. Not something I use. I assumed that it would work since it is gcc, but I guess more stuff needs to be ported. Alan NishiokaArticle: 94492
Hello! > As I wrote earlier I'll be at work next tuesday, and I'll try to use > your advices. > I'll post results on this topic. Time is going so fast.... Ok, my fault, It is following reason of V2 behaving, I've checked lines which was pulluped. That's all, false alert. I'm sorry, I've disturbed you. Kind regards Jerzy GburArticle: 94493
Hi Colin,
In the Assembler settings tab, select 'Always enable input
buffers' and recompile the design.
Hope this helps,
Subroto Datta
Altera Corp.
Article: 94494I'm writing a feature article for FPGA Journal (www.fpgajournal.com) about FPGAs and the re-birth of the electronics hobbyist. My theory is that electronics as a hobby went through a "dark age" period, maybe from the early/mid 1970s until recently becuase of the inaccessibility and cost of designing with state-of-the-art technology. Radio Shack shifted their focus from 50-in-1 project kits and hobbyist parts to selling toys, cell-phones, and stereo equipment. Now, with the emergence of low-cost, high-capability FPGAs, development boards, and design software, I see a new age of hobbyist activity beginning (as often evidenced in this group). I'm looking for a few people that would be willing to express views on this topic for the article. I know, Austin will probably post a strong technical argument that Xilinx FPGAs are uniquely attractive to the hobbyist, somebody from Altera will send me a Cubic Cyclonium prototyping paperweight (they're very cool), and Actel and Lattice people will post just to remind us that they have low-cost kits too, but I'm primarily interested in some info from real, live, "working" hobbyists. Any takers?Article: 94495
backhus wrote: > wuyi316904@gmail.com schrieb: >> Hi,in my project,i need some bufs to delay some signals,but after >> synthesising,the code:#20 does't have any affects.Is there some way to >> keep the delay?For example,some constraint for synthesis or other. >> > Hi, > The verilog # operater and the vhdl after statement are not > synthesizable and (as you already observed) therefore ignored during > synthesis. > > As mentioned before by cationebox, Flipflops/registres are a proper way > to delay signals by n clock periods (n = number of serialized ffs ). Probably worth mentioning DCMs/PLLs as well here - these allow you to do fine phase shifting on a clock, which can then be used (assuming clock domain boundaries are crossed correctly) to clock flip-flops with different timings than your original clock. JeremyArticle: 94496
The low cost starter kits are great - not restricted to FPGAs. Both Microchip/PIC and Atmel/AVR have starter kits under $100, available from Digikey. Anybody got a list of hobbyist friendly vendors? I'm thinking of places like Digilent. The problem with FPGAs and CPLDs that I see is getting the raw parts in small quantities at hobbyist friendly stores. Most distributors are interested in large volumes. They aren't really setup for hobbyists. The Xilinx store still doesn't carry the small Coolrunner IIs. Digikey doesn't stock any of them. -- The suespammers.org mail server is located in California. So are all my other mailboxes. Please do not send unsolicited bulk e-mail or unsolicited commercial e-mail to my suespammers.org address or any of my other addresses. These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.Article: 94497
"Kevin Morris" <kevin@techfocusmedia.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:1137096913.255199.239090@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com... > I'm writing a feature article for FPGA Journal (www.fpgajournal.com) > about FPGAs and the re-birth of the electronics hobbyist. My theory is > that electronics as a hobby went through a "dark age" period, maybe > from the early/mid 1970s until recently becuase of the inaccessibility > and cost of designing with state-of-the-art technology. Radio Shack > shifted their focus from 50-in-1 project kits and hobbyist parts to > selling toys, cell-phones, and stereo equipment. > > Now, with the emergence of low-cost, high-capability FPGAs, development > boards, and design software, I see a new age of hobbyist activity > beginning (as often evidenced in this group). > > I'm looking for a few people that would be willing to express views on > this topic for the article. > > I know, Austin will probably post a strong technical argument that > Xilinx FPGAs are uniquely attractive to the hobbyist, somebody from > Altera will send me a Cubic Cyclonium prototyping paperweight (they're > very cool), and Actel and Lattice people will post just to remind us > that they have low-cost kits too, but I'm primarily interested in some > info from real, live, "working" hobbyists. > > Any takers? > I am actually not so hobbyist, but I have my fun some times Spartan3E VQ100 on single sided toner transfer made PCB http://xilant.com/content/view/35/2/ DIL24 (GAL like) Spartan3-100 based module works as MMC card in card reader http://xilant.com/content/view/33/55/ my FPGA protoboard pictures are lost unfortunatly xilinx isnt actually the best for hobby because of the 3 power supplies required sometimes you can get it with 2 power supplies (if VCCIO is 2.5) so all other vendors have an small advantage here, with the true single supply chips being the best, in generic it really looks like it may come to DIY electronic rebirth again - if I can help here I would be glad - there are so many thing any FPGA board can do because of its reprogrammability for true do it all yourself hobby bastler Lattice XP in TQ144 is possible the easiest to handle so what info are you looking and what is it where you look for takers ? Actel has no low kits (no real low cost). for xilinx/lattice kit prices start from 50USD 50EUR, for Altera has been same all actel kits are 149USD+ the only interesting Actel thing is the Fusion starterkit and that costs already 399EUR -- Antti Lukats http://www.xilant.comArticle: 94498
Kevin Morris wrote: > I'm writing a feature article for FPGA Journal (www.fpgajournal.com) > about FPGAs and the re-birth of the electronics hobbyist. My theory is > that electronics as a hobby went through a "dark age" period, maybe > from the early/mid 1970s until recently becuase of the inaccessibility > and cost of designing with state-of-the-art technology. Radio Shack > shifted their focus from 50-in-1 project kits and hobbyist parts to > selling toys, cell-phones, and stereo equipment. > > Now, with the emergence of low-cost, high-capability FPGAs, development > boards, and design software, I see a new age of hobbyist activity > beginning (as often evidenced in this group). There is also a parallel in the Microcontroller sector. With most new devices having FLASH and OnChip debug, the level of entry for capable in-system debug, has dropped. SiLabs have a sub $10 USB ToolStick, Zilog had some sub $10 demos, and I think now have $39 Eval/Demo Boards. Freescale have a new $50 promo USB system... > > I'm looking for a few people that would be willing to express views on > this topic for the article. > I know, Austin will probably post a strong technical argument that > Xilinx FPGAs are uniquely attractive to the hobbyist, somebody from > Altera will send me a Cubic Cyclonium prototyping paperweight (they're > very cool), and Actel and Lattice people will post just to remind us > that they have low-cost kits too, but I'm primarily interested in some > info from real, live, "working" hobbyists. Lattice have the OpenSource Mico8, and their MachXO means you can get a tiny, but working, SoftCPU in one low cost chip. AS Assembler has added support for the Mico8, giving a second ASM tool flow. > > Any takers? <paste> Hal Murray wrote: > The Xilinx store still doesn't carry the small Coolrunner IIs. > Digikey doesn't stock any of them. Yes, alas, more signs of 'big company syndrome' from Xilinx :( How hard can it have been to have ensured the newish '32A/64A' were there, before they yanked the older ones.... ? ( and in the new packages too ?! ) With the Webstore as it is now, users might think any/all of a) They do not want these in new designs b) There is some supply problem, with smaller CPLDs c) Xilinx is phasing out emphasis on smaller CPLDs [Xilinx are now last in release of new CPLD devices..] -jgArticle: 94499
On 12 Jan 2006 12:15:13 -0800, "Kevin Morris" <kevin@techfocusmedia.com> wrote: >I'm writing a feature article for FPGA Journal (www.fpgajournal.com) >about FPGAs and the re-birth of the electronics hobbyist. My theory is >that electronics as a hobby went through a "dark age" period, maybe >from the early/mid 1970s until recently becuase of the inaccessibility >and cost of designing with state-of-the-art technology. Radio Shack >shifted their focus from 50-in-1 project kits and hobbyist parts to >selling toys, cell-phones, and stereo equipment. er, no, I wouldn't have said the late 70's or 80s were in any way a dark age for the hobbyist... admittedly around 1980 all a hobbyist had to play with was the Z80 or 6502, but at the time they WERE state of the art. It was probably the last time a hobbyist could build a computer, modify or even write the BIOS, and actually understand pretty much every detail of a machine capable of running the leading OS and applications. >Now, with the emergence of low-cost, high-capability FPGAs, development >boards, and design software, I see a new age of hobbyist activity >beginning (as often evidenced in this group). If anything, it's a return to those days, with Linux in the place of CP/M, (though Linux is too big to _really_ understand), and with WebPack in the place of that fat orange book (you know the one), 16-pin sockets, and the wire wrap tool. Pete A will probably maintain the fat book was actually bright red! >I'm looking for a few people that would be willing to express views on >this topic for the article. > but I'm primarily interested in some >info from real, live, "working" hobbyists. Digital clock, 1978. FM tuner, 1979. Dictation type cassette recorder, hacked for hi-fi stereo headphone use, in progress summer 1980. Yes, the summer the Walkman came out. Grrr... Richard Russell Board (Z80, 32k later 64k RAM; a BBC OS (not BBC Micro!) and later CPM 1982,3,4) An oddball (but good!) in the ZX80, ZX81 era. Mahogany laptop (64180 based) ca 1987, but it was getting obsolete faster than I could finish it... Vacuum tube amp restorations, various. Some deaf microphones, ca 1995, until I gave up and used commercial capsules. (The electronics and enclosures were my own though) Don't know if these count. ...then working from home and non-electronic hobbies started taking over... - Brian
Site Home Archive Home FAQ Home How to search the Archive How to Navigate the Archive
Compare FPGA features and resources
Threads starting:
Authors:A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z